Solarizing Polaroid Type 55 Negs Sabattier Effect

[Alex Hawley]

I have been playing with Type 55 and the Sabattier effect today. No prints yet, the negs are still drying. I have searched both APUG, the LF Forum, Polaroid.com, and Google but have found scant detail on the process. So I took the simple route and held my Sunpak 333 flash unit above negatives and fired it at various power levels. I separated the prints and negs at about 20 seconds after starting development then fired the flash.

Just wondering if anyone has a more sophisticated technique they would be willing to share.

 

[smieglitz]

Alex,

Have you had any images reverse at all doing this?

I believe most of the "solarized" images I've seen off Polaroid negatives have been the result of rephotographing the image that partially reverses on the paper negative that one peels from non-p/n Polaroid films.

If you do get the type 55 image to partially reverse I'd sure like to see the results posted and hear how you did it.

Joe

 

[Alex Hawley]

Thanks Joe. Yes, each one that I tried has reversal evident in the negative. As soon as I make some prints, I will post them with full details of each process.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Alex

I have heard of exactly the method you are doing, just keep pounding the exposure . once you find out how many burst produce what effect you then can repeat the look if the scene stays somewhat the same.

I would be interested in your results, If you could pm me some of your images , I do a lot of solarization at the print stage and would be interested to see your results.

Bob

 

[Alex Hawley]

It Ain't So Hard Afterall

Turns out this ain't so hard afterall. Attached are two examples; each printed from the regular neg and the solarized neg.

These are the best ones I got. The Polaroid positive/negative was separated after 15-20 seconds development (normal time would be 1 minute when exposed at asa 25) then the negative was flashed with my sunpak 333 strobe at its full power setting. The strobe was held about 6 or 8 inches above the negative.

I proved to myself that developing for longer periods before flashing greatly reduces the Sabattier effect. Flashing at about 10-5 seconds produces a stronger effect and is probably the minimum development time you can get away with.

The mottling effect and lines in the background are from the developer gel getting swirled around from peeling the negative/print apart. Kind of unpredictable.

I think what changes the most is that the composition needs to be different. In both examples, the flower vase seems to be "floating". This isn't so evident in the straight print.

It's fun. More to pursue here.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Very Nice Alex

I have a large portfolio of solarized prints that I will be putting on a website for my lady and myself.
I think I am going to try this method as well with my workflow .

I have found with solarization, the simpler the subject matter the better the outcome.
very complicated or busy backgrounds , I find are boring when solarized.
By doing the solarization on the print you can control the real and unreal portions of the image which I like controlling very much.

But if you get a good polaroid neg solarized , it is just a matter of rehiting the exposure on a limited edition of prints.

I hope you continue with this and send me some views of the work as you progress.

 

[terri]

I think they both look great! The "mottling" effect you mention isn't hurting my feelings a bit here, I think it only adds dimension to the finished image.

Nice work! I'll be interested in seeing what else you get.

 

[Timothy]

I agree with terri. The whole idea of Sabattier or solarizing is to get a kind of "other-world" sort of image. The "floating vase" that you mentioned adds to that as well. I like it.

Tim R

 

[buggy]

Alex, I really like this effect. I was wondering, are you fixing the negatives after the flash?

 

[Alex Hawley]

Thanks everybody for taking the time to look and comment.

Buggy, yes I do fix the negatives after developing. I run them through 3-4 minutes in a standard hardening fixer. The literature I read cautioned against using a rapid fixer so I have never tried it. Don't know what effect it would have, but it was St. Ansel's technique that I was reading. He generally knew what he was doing with this stuff.

 

[doughowk]

Attended a lecture this evening on artistic use of Polaroid film. One of the lecturers who does still lifes mentioned he holds the 55 P/N negative up to the sunlight just after peeling them apart to get a halo or minimal solarized effect around the object. Nice effect.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Attended a lecture this evening on artistic use of Polaroid film. One of the lecturers who does still lifes mentioned he holds the 55 P/N negative up to the sunlight just after peeling them apart to get a halo or minimal solarized effect around the object. Nice effect.

Interesting Doug and thanks. Did he say how long he lets it develop before peeling apart?

 

[doughowk]

Alex, he treated it normally; but, after peeling and before placing in clearing bath - sodium sulfite, would hold negative up to sun for few seconds or longer. Appears to be at least two controls - time to peel & time exposed to bright light after peeling. Thanks for the idea.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Thanks everybody for taking the time to look and comment.

Buggy, yes I do fix the negatives after developing. I run them through 3-4 minutes in a standard hardening fixer. The literature I read cautioned against using a rapid fixer so I have never tried it. Don't know what effect it would have, but it was St. Ansel's technique that I was reading. He generally knew what he was doing with this stuff.

Alex. Is not a concentrated solution of sodium sulfite all required to clear off the goo, why the need for a fixer????
second part of question that may answer the first, I use a 665 pos to neg process, is this what you are doing ??

 

[doughowk]

Hazarding a guess - early peeling apart of the sandwich before Polaroid goo has time to totally act on negative, the negative will need additional fixing. Since Sodium Sulfite can act as a fixer, the SS clearing bath would also act as a fixing bath.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Here's what I do for post-clearing of Type 55. Let me say again, this is done after clearing the negative. I got this from one of the forums, can't remember which one, and it is qouted from Ansel Adam's tretise on Polaroid photography:

Rinse the negatives
Fix the negatives in a standard fixing bath for three to four minutes. Do not use a rapid fixer.
Rinse again.
Place the negatives in a hypo-clearing bath mixed 20:1 with a small amount of Kodak selenium toner and soak for two to three minutes.
Rinse yet again.
Wash thoroughly.
Rinse in Kodak Photo-Flo or another wetting agent for about a minute. (Adams, p.55-6)

I don't always use the selnium treatment.

 

[donbga]

Interesting Doug and thanks. Did he say how long he lets it develop before peeling apart?

Alex,

Have you considered processing the film with regular film developer and solarizing during the development?

 

[Alex Hawley]

Alex,

Have you considered processing the film with regular film developer and solarizing during the development?

I've thought about it Don but haven't done it. I kind of like the convenience of developing the film without the darkroom. Maybe someday.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Alex,

Have you considered processing the film with regular film developer and solarizing during the development?

I use to do this with colour film when I worked at a dip and dunk colour lab.

Basically when the rack raised after the first minute of development I flashed on the room lights and then let the entire process complete. some very interesting results.

By the way , this really pissed off my boss as the machine could only run the film to be flashed and at this time this lab ran film non stop.

 

[Bob Carnie]

Alex,

Have you considered processing the film with regular film developer and solarizing during the development?

I also think this is how Man Ray solarized his work. I do not think he solarized at the print stage. Maybe someone knows for sure???
I recently bought some tanks and holders for 4x5 and 8x10 film so that I can do the film solarization and see how it differs from the print solarization.

 

[buggy]

Alex,

I tried this technique today and did not see the reversal in the negative. I am probably missing some minor, but important point, or I am not looking for the right thing.

Please excuse my questions on this but I have alot.

Is the reversal evident immediately after flashing or does it manifest later as the negative dries?

I have used both the sun, very bright today, and my Nikon N75 built in flash to try this technique. Are these sources not powerful enough? Do I need a flash unit such as the one you have?

You indicate you peel at 20 seconds. The total dev. time at my temperature is 20 seconds. The polaroid website recommends to get this effect peel at 1/4 to 1/3 the normal time. Are you working in a colder climate to get the slower dev. times? I have been peeling the film at 5 seconds. Is that not enough time for the developer to begin its work?

That's all for now. Again, sorry for all the questions. Thanks

 

[Bob Carnie]

Buggy

pound the flash at the poloroid, I have heard of people doing 10-20 bursts at full power. go too far and then back up.

 

[Alex Hawley]

Hey Buggy,

When I'm exposing type 55 for the negative, I rate it at ASA 25 and let it develop for 60 seconds. This is the old Ansel Adams method. I did my solarizations the same way except peeling and blasting with the flash at 10-20 seconds. Then I let it continue developing for the full 60 seconds before dunking it in water for clearing.

I couldn't really see the Sabattier effect until I cleared the negs. I could see it somewhat after a couple or three minutes in the water, when the goop has loosened up.

As Bob suggests, blast with the flash at full power, maybe six inches above the neg and see what you get. Then vary the flash/power distance for more or less effect.

 

[buggy]

Bob, Thanks, I will definitely try that.

Alex, I also usually expose for the neg. at ASA 25 and usually develop for 2 minutes. I know the development probably stops at a minute but I usually go longer just to make sure I go all the way to the end of development. For the Sabattier effect I was following Polaroids website which states you probably need to shoot at the rated print speed, ASA 50, to account for the extra exposure given by the flashing of the negative.

Although, that's what polaroid recommends, I can see your results right before my eyes, and like what I see, so I am going to follow your procedures to see what I can come up with.

I made an attempt earlier today and posted it in the experimental gallery, but for that one I rated at ASA 50, peeled apart at 4 seconds, flashed 6 bursts, sandwiched the print and neg. back together for about 2 seconds, then went out in the sun and dried the negative in the sun. I didn't clear or wash it. The image is a scan of the negative.

I hope you do some more images using this technique and post them. The images are very good and very interesting.

 

[Alex Hawley]

I hope you do some more images using this technique and post them. The images are very good and very interesting.

Thanks Buggy. I just looked at the one you posted and its quite interesting. Quite a different effect. There's quite a bit of lattitude to play with. Something different everytime you try.